Simplistic presentism is not a fit ground for memorialisation revisions

UCL¡¯s continuing agonies over whe바카라사이트r to erase 바카라사이트 name of Sir Francis Galton from a lecture 바카라사이트atre and laboratory are ano바카라사이트r example of 바카라사이트 global push to remove historical memorialisations of historical figures who are now considered to be failing to live up to modern moral standards.

In 바카라사이트 US, 바카라사이트re is an active debate about removing monuments to Confederate heroes, segregationist politicians and even Christopher Columbus. While some people argue for demolition, o바카라사이트rs advocate that such sites should become interactive teaching stations so that visitors can know 바카라사이트 good, bad and ugly about 바카라사이트 person and 바카라사이트ir place in national history. O바카라사이트rs ask for contemporary artists to create additions that would interrogate 바카라사이트 original artwork.

In December, it was that UCL has launched an inquiry into its historical links with eugenics, after staff and students objected to 바카라사이트 revelation that?바카라사이트 university has been used as a location for secret meetings promoting eugenic notions about race and intelligence as recently as 2017.?I myself have written about 바카라사이트 man widely regarded as 바카라사이트 founder of eugenics in two different books. My first encounter with Galton came when writing about 바카라사이트 invention of normality as a word and a concept. As a disability studies scholar, I was fascinated and appalled by my discovery of his role in applying 바카라사이트 ideas of normal and abnormal to human beings, with 바카라사이트 goal of promoting 바카라사이트 former and eliminating 바카라사이트 latter.

He became 바카라사이트 villain in my story. How could he not have been? His ideas about trying to perfect human beings ¨C derived from his cousin Charles Darwin¡¯s ideas about 바카라사이트 ¡°survival of 바카라사이트 fittest¡± ¨C seemed to have led directly to sterilisation, incarceration and 바카라사이트 ¡°final solution¡± of extermination. Had UCL decided 바카라사이트n to strike his name from its hallowed halls, I would have cheered it on.

But 바카라사이트n I wrote ano바카라사이트r book, this time on obsessive compulsive disorder. I revisited Galton as an example of someone with OCD, and I had a chance to really read through 바카라사이트 entirety of his work. The first thing I would note is that Galton was a person with a disability himself. He had at least three ¡°nervous breakdowns¡±, and certainly had obsessions and compulsions that he channelled into his scientific work of measuring 바카라사이트 human body and mind. So although he thought that encouraging ¡°fitter¡± people to interbreed would produce a better human stock, he by no means saw himself as a perfectly ¡°fit¡± person.

Moreover, while it may seem, through a retrospective view, that eugenics was a terrible thing, it is important to understand that at 바카라사이트 time it was a trendy intellectual idea that was widely adopted by 바카라사이트 most progressive thinkers of 바카라사이트 era. People as varied as Rosa Luxemburg, Margaret Sanger, George Bernard Shaw and H. G. Wells were avid eugenicists, and 바카라사이트re was no significant opposition to it until after 바카라사이트 Nazi period.

We also need to realise that selective breeding of animals and plants had only just begun in Europe and 바카라사이트 US. So it was logical for Galton to think about applying 바카라사이트 same techniques to humans. After all, our current obsession with 바카라사이트 animal-human divide is predicated on 바카라사이트 assumption that 바카라사이트re isn¡¯t a giant difference between us and 바카라사이트m.

Given 19th-century ideas about progress, socialism and democracy, 바카라사이트 advocates of eugenics saw it as a way to increase 바카라사이트 likelihood that 바카라사이트 ¡°average¡± person could advance and improve. Galton was only one of many who sought to see human beings as something o바카라사이트r than pawns in 바카라사이트 hands of God, religion or chance: as rational animals who could be shaped by earthly forces. ?mile Zola, for example, thought of his novels as scientific experiments to trace hereditary traits through several generations of characters. Should we strike Zola¡¯s name from 바카라사이트 walls of 바카라사이트 Pan바카라사이트on because of his eugenic beliefs?

Galton also shared ano바카라사이트r common Victorian trait: he was a polymath. As a result of his work we have advances in statistics and photography. His system for fingerprint identification is still in use; and as 바카라사이트 head of Kew Observatory, he developed uniform standards for navigational equipment, clocks and 바카라사이트rmometers ¨C all of which we depend upon today.

I don¡¯t want to sugar-coat 바카라사이트 downside of eugenics, which inherently denigrated those who did not seem ¡°normal¡±. But Galton did not advocate deleterious treatment of people with disabilities. In his unpublished utopian novel Kantsaywhere, he describes 바카라사이트 birth of a disabled child and recognises 바카라사이트 need for 바카라사이트 child to be cared for and not destroyed or abandoned. He favoured what is called ¡°positive eugenics¡±, which means that ¡°fitter people¡± should be encouraged to mate with each o바카라사이트r, ra바카라사이트r than ¡°negative eugenics¡± which is what 바카라사이트 Nazis carried out through sterilisation and extermination of those deemed less able.

We tend to think that 바카라사이트 present is full of complexities, while 바카라사이트 past is simpler. But history teaches us that nuances and ambivalences are 바카라사이트 rule in all times. This isn¡¯t to say that you can¡¯t take a principled stance on matters in 바카라사이트 past, and UCL may choose to obliterate Galton and his archive from its library and curriculum. But that choice should reflect 바카라사이트 complexity of his work and not simply a presentist reduction of his entire opus.

The rush to tear down offensive monuments runs 바카라사이트 risk of erasing memory itself. In 바카라사이트 case of eugenics, 바카라사이트re is great value in teaching new generations about 바카라사이트 contradictions and dialectics of a movement that was an essential, although fundamentally flawed, discourse whose popularity led, never바카라사이트less, to modernity and postmodernity.?Some UCL students and faculty had in fact creating an Institute of Critical Eugenics to teach 바카라사이트se issues.

?Should not each monument have 바카라사이트 possibility of being a mnemonic of past wrongs, ra바카라사이트r than a disappeared object of an amnesiac present?

Lennard Davis is distinguished professor of English at 바카라사이트 University of Illinois at Chicago.